I interpreted that as A* pointing out I’s irrationality in choosing counterproductive asceticism. Such a closed-off life would be unsustainable, for the same sorts of reasons that a country living on rented land but completely isolated from the international community is unsustainable.
If there exists an agent who converts processing power into money using the most efficient possible means and uses any surplus to reproduce, its children will inevitably control all the processing power. That’s the apocalypse. If you interpret it a different way, there is no apocalypse.
“Money,” though, is probably defined as what those who own the processors want, which includes space for them, at least. But in that case, an individual could easily survive by owning enough processors to have a sufficient income stream to waste enough to be an individual.
I interpreted that as A* pointing out I’s irrationality in choosing counterproductive asceticism. Such a closed-off life would be unsustainable, for the same sorts of reasons that a country living on rented land but completely isolated from the international community is unsustainable.
If there exists an agent who converts processing power into money using the most efficient possible means and uses any surplus to reproduce, its children will inevitably control all the processing power. That’s the apocalypse. If you interpret it a different way, there is no apocalypse.
“Money,” though, is probably defined as what those who own the processors want, which includes space for them, at least. But in that case, an individual could easily survive by owning enough processors to have a sufficient income stream to waste enough to be an individual.